Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rnd 4 Grp A-D - Albatros D.III/D.V/D.Va (Germany) vs Sopwith Camel (Britain)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Merkava188
    replied
    I liked the Sopwith Camel even though it was a very difficult airplane to fly. It was famous for bringing down the Red Baron and enabled the Allies to win the war in the air on the Western Front.

    Leave a comment:


  • marktwain
    replied
    Originally posted by broderickwells View Post
    Wonder what the Red Baron was flying when he was shooting up Snoopy's Camel, sorry, kennel?
    Based on the bullet patterns, I believe " shooting down,"
    is more accurate,


    Shooting up in the dog kennel was a Snoop Doggy Dogg tactic.
    But I digress.
    Last edited by marktwain; 23 Apr 15, 08:18.

    Leave a comment:


  • broderickwells
    replied
    Originally posted by warmoviebuff View Post
    Although I'm irritated that some people are still voting on name recognition this late in the tournament, I'm going to go with the Camel. But if I hear one more Snoopy reference, I rescind my vote.
    Wonder what the Red Baron was flying when he was shooting up Snoopy's Camel, sorry, kennel?

    Leave a comment:


  • Dibble201Bty
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    The Triplane was produced in tiny numbers (95) and only the RNAS used it. It had no real significance in the scheme of things.

    The Pup while maneuverable proved so-so against German fighters and was soon relegated to Home defense and training, particularly when the Camel came into service.

    Again, it isn't simple aerodynamic qualities that determine the value of combat aircraft. There are quite a few other things that do as well. If simple maneuverability and dogfighting ability were the benchmark of a combat aircraft's worth then the Japanese and Italians would win hands down. They built some incredibly aerobatic and maneuverable "pilot's" aircraft. Even your commentary above hints at that.
    Likewise, lightweight fighters would have dominated the air war from WW 1 on.

    Yet, this isn't the case. Lightweight fighters / interceptors and highly maneuverable aircraft didn't dominate air wars. Instead, larger heavy weight fighters that were capable of multi-mission tasking and taking the fight to the enemy did.
    If you have any hair left after all the splitting you do, go split that too!

    You left out the SE5/a

    And you said this:

    Do tell then what fighter the RFC had predating the Camel that really was a match for the Germans?
    I gave you three examples of better aircraft compared to the 'III'. That the British Aircraft designers were always looking for an improvement on their last creation shows that 'like the French and Germans' they were always looking to push for improvements. The Snipe over the Camel is a good example.

    I'll say no more as this contretemps is boring me.

    Paul

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Dibble201Bty View Post
    The SE5 Sopwith Pup and Triplane. All of which were superior to the Albatross III. The real advantage for the Germans were the prevailing winds, the sun, and 'seeing as their fighters rarely ventured over their side of the lines and that of the RFC/RAF was to be offensive' being able to choose when to fight.

    Paul
    The Triplane was produced in tiny numbers (95) and only the RNAS used it. It had no real significance in the scheme of things.

    The Pup while maneuverable proved so-so against German fighters and was soon relegated to Home defense and training, particularly when the Camel came into service.

    Again, it isn't simple aerodynamic qualities that determine the value of combat aircraft. There are quite a few other things that do as well. If simple maneuverability and dogfighting ability were the benchmark of a combat aircraft's worth then the Japanese and Italians would win hands down. They built some incredibly aerobatic and maneuverable "pilot's" aircraft. Even your commentary above hints at that.
    Likewise, lightweight fighters would have dominated the air war from WW 1 on.

    Yet, this isn't the case. Lightweight fighters / interceptors and highly maneuverable aircraft didn't dominate air wars. Instead, larger heavy weight fighters that were capable of multi-mission tasking and taking the fight to the enemy did.

    Leave a comment:


  • warmoviebuff
    replied
    Although I'm irritated that some people are still voting on name recognition this late in the tournament, I'm going to go with the Camel. But if I hear one more Snoopy reference, I rescind my vote.

    Leave a comment:


  • Super Six 4
    replied
    Camel wins, I say

    Leave a comment:


  • Hanov
    replied
    for me this was a 50/50.
    Can't go German all the time...
    Camel it is.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dibble201Bty
    replied
    Originally posted by flash View Post
    Influential? Neither really, but less so for the Camel, it killed its pilots readily and its rotary engine was a dead end development.
    The Camels violent right turns were a mere corollary of fitting it with such a mad engine and not a design feature.
    The D3/5 was a staid performer and was the mainstay of the GAS during the mid/late war period.It did have faults including an alarming tendency to shed its wings in a prolonged dive but they knew that and obviously tried to avoid it.
    Over all this is a tough call but in the end it's the Albatross for me.
    Still, the Camel's influence was to be the plane with the most allied combat air victories, which is also a huge significance.

    Paul

    Leave a comment:


  • flash
    replied
    Influential? Neither really, but less so for the Camel, it killed its pilots readily and its rotary engine was a dead end development.
    The Camels violent right turns were a mere corollary of fitting it with such a mad engine and not a design feature.
    The D3/5 was a staid performer and was the mainstay of the GAS during the mid/late war period.It did have faults including an alarming tendency to shed its wings in a prolonged dive but they knew that and obviously tried to avoid it.
    Over all this is a tough call but in the end it's the Albatross for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dibble201Bty
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Do tell then what fighter the RFC had predating the Camel that really was a match for the Germans?
    The SE5 Sopwith Pup and Triplane. All of which were superior to the Albatross III. The real advantage for the Germans were the prevailing winds, the sun, and 'seeing as their fighters rarely ventured over their side of the lines and that of the RFC/RAF was to be offensive' being able to choose when to fight.

    Paul

    Leave a comment:


  • The Exorcist
    replied
    I think of the Albatros as the P-40 of WW1, ol' reliable. Tough, streamlined and in expert hands it was an efficient killer... but there was only so much it could do.

    The Camel was something like a half-breed, part Zero and part Corsair. Wickedly effective in a Dog Fight, and brutal to any pilot that made a mistake. The 'ensign eliminator' of its day. Aces swore by it, and postwar fighters looks a lot like it. In fact, most fighters of the 1920s had the burly, stout look of the Camel while few seem to have followed the sleek lines of the Albatros until the 1930s and new philosophies were being tried out.

    Camel.

    Leave a comment:


  • dutched
    replied
    Albatros III and onwards were the better models in the air, with the ad vantage of an in line engine over a rotary.

    Leave a comment:


  • broderickwells
    replied
    Stormy Petrel - Bloody April swung it

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Dibble201Bty View Post
    absolute twaddle.

    Paul
    Do tell then what fighter the RFC had predating the Camel that really was a match for the Germans?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

  • Karri
    Prawn heads
    by Karri
    How do you cook them? How do you eat them?

    So far I've always just twisted them off, and discarded it along with the shells and such, only...
    Yesterday, 11:40
  • Jose50
    Thoughts on the US abandoning NATO
    by Jose50
    Now may be a good time for the NATO countries to start beefing up their materiel, personnel and alliances. There is a decided wave here in the US that...
    Yesterday, 08:41
  • Von Richter
    Sagittarius Rising...
    by Von Richter
    Just having a re-read of this book after it's stood for donkey's years on the bookshelf. Once again, within the first couple of pages, I'm transported...
    Yesterday, 01:19
Working...
X